Question for Evolutionist's

What some call Evolution, I call adaptation. A few sparrows dropped on Hawaii hundreds of years ago have "adapted" to the new environment producing
a number of Varieties that remain unchanged to this day. Insects found in (fossil) amber show that some species have died out, but also that some have
remained unchanged for a hundred million years. There are fewer species now than ever. A LOT fewer.

And how do they and other life forms endure? Why, with the egg, the seed, the womb and genetic code (it is encoded, right?). The first seed or egg had
to come FROM somewhere right? If you take the human population back you get less and less people until there are only two. Where did those two come
from? Same with most other life forms. They don't reproduce between species, right? They don't mix. And if they do, they can't reproduce. Thats a
good fail safe.

The second law of thermodynamics states that all systems are in a continual state of decay. As we grow, we grow older and break down, not across or
up. No cell in our body has ever been shown to mutate into a higher purpose, only lower. The body does not store mutated evolving cells in a closet
somewhere waiting for another upgrade. If it is not a good blood cell or brain cell, then it is discarded by the body to preserve the integrity of the
system. The body is either healthy or diseased, thanks to the immune system, which purpose is to prevent mutation from spreading. Trouble is man made
toxins overpower that integrity giving rise to mutation, disease and death. The human Genome is decaying from a higher state not evolving to something
better.

where does god live, show me GOD . no one has ever been able to show me scientific prrof of god. a belief in god is a wonderful if it helps you with
your fear of the after life but please donot confuse it with facts

Thanks but the Fossil Record is not scientific method science, it's purely speculative because its not observable, repeatable, or refutable and thus
does not qualify as either a scientific fact or theory. Sounds like a faith to me?

Thanks but the Fossil Record is not scientific method science, it's purely speculative because its not observable, repeatable, or refutable and thus
does not qualify as either a scientific fact or theory. Sounds like a faith to me?

I think this fully would qualify as a theory....just not a law. It is pretty much observation, hypothesis, theory, law. With what you are describing
it would be impossible at this time for it to be the "Law of Evolution", but a theory it is...which is working its way towards a law.

The evidence in religion is stories, myths, and a book or books in some cases. And there is the fact that there are 100s of religions who all say
something different. In science you may have a few theories but it is nothing like religion.

There may be a god....but he has nothing to do with those little books floating around or the churches asking for you money.

This is my thinking as well. We adapt to our surroundings....or die off.

The beginning species of our Human Race can be dug up possibly and we still do not have a clue .....

It is fascinating really. We are like the blind leading the blind. We have many theories and speculations. We have writings on the cave walls, scribes
being dug up and artifacts to boot. Do we believe them? If so...which meaning should we hold onto? The meaning told to us by...Joe...Jim....or Bob?

"Our" human History can be found everywhere. We are still in awe over the Pyramids. There are many speculations as to how they were built and who
built them as well. This is "Our" nature though....to gather evidence, ask questions and come up with a "theory". A theory though...does not make
it fact.

What do we really know though.....about our History? A lot! Depending on what evidence you believe is clearly an individual choice and not a
collective one.

Do we all believe the Egyptians made the Pyramids and can we also all agree they were positioned for a reason based on the "heaven's"? No? Why not?
Is it not obvious? It is to me.

Above is just a small example of our History seen out of the eyes of my perception of truth.

Is it..... there is NO WAY for us to find what we are looking for in regards to where we came from and where we are going?

Is it that "truth" is scattered among a huge society that has added and taken away bits to fit their idea? Possible.

I am not sure we will ever KNOW where we came from and where we are going as a scientific fact.

It is all based on scattered truths, perceptions, and theories of one individual to another.

Is there a book for "Where we came from and where we are going for Dummies"? YES!!!

There are many books to choose from but still.....based on scattered truths, perceptions, and theories.

Religions
Science
Astrology
Atheism
Physics
*add in your own*

We learn in school to play the "secret game" where one person whispers a secret and the secret goes around the circle of the class....and it becomes
a "different worded secret". The world is filled with these "secrets" that are scattered truths.

There really is no argument that is more right than the next. It is all based on what YOU think and although YOU can be persuaded to think just like
someone else I can still promise you that no two people will think just alike so what you take on from someone else is still different.

I believe in a singularity and or a designer and I call this God. Is it more than one energy? I do not care. Does it have a name? I still do not care.
Is it mean and going to throw me in a hell? Well....I care but I have no control...moving on......

Who cares? We do!!! We all really care where we came from and where we are going. It is left up to you to decide where you came from and where you are
going because each one of us is "free to think" as we may with all the scattered bs we find our selves swimming in.

I have to wonder though....is it meant to be scattered with different languages and so many truths it is confusing? Does EVERY person have to rely on
a "faith" to believe or not to believe? I think so.

where does god live, show me GOD . no one has ever been able to show me scientific prrof of god. a belief in god is a wonderful if it helps you with
your fear of the after life but please donot confuse it with facts

BUT,,what "facts" are you referring to?

Can you prove there is NO God?

Some believing in a creator may not be out of "fear"....how can you claim that when you are not even a believer?

Thanks but the Fossil Record is not scientific method science, it's purely speculative because its not observable, repeatable, or refutable and thus
does not qualify as either a scientific fact or theory. Sounds like a faith to me?

For some reason you believe that science and archaeology don't mix. This used to be a classic argument in the past, and that's pretty much all I can
agree with you on. Let's look at a few definitions:

What is Science? a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the
universe

Scientific facts are verified by repeatable experiments. Experiments don't always mean mixing reagents in flasks and making explosions, what is the
definition of an experiment?

Experiment: A method of testing - with the goal of explaining - the nature of reality. that is ALL. Now how about the Scientific Method?

Scientific Method: The steps of the scientific method are to:
Ask a Question
Do Background Research
Construct a Hypothesis
Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
Communicate Your Results

Now, up until now, I fail to see why you disagree. Most likely because you yourself have no clear idea of what any of the words I have defined up till
now mean. You are the victim of social conditioning, having done no research on your own, instead relying upon word of mouth to expand your knowledge
base.

Now, why do people post the fossil record as evidence towards evolutionary theory? Is that really enough? Well let's look at the definition of
theory:

Theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is
widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

There is no reason why it cannot be used. It is perfectly acceptable, because it is evidence which MAKES SENSE showing the theory to be accurate as it
has been proposed. That's all that matters. As long as the charts are showing this, the theory holds. End of discussion on that matter.

Now, you are asking for evidence- observable, measurable evidence of a phenomenon that takes tens of thousands to millions of years to occur. O.k,
that's not being realistic. But, what happens during that time period. Change over time, right? If you've read Origin of Species, you would know that
Darwin NEVER actually said the word "evolution" (nor did he mention survival of the fittest) in his writings. He simply believed in "Change over
time", adaptations which arose due to their need in the biological organism. That's all it is. You seem to think Evolution is something radical, but I
ask you, is there indeed evidence of change over time within our short history of existence? Does it occur do to changes in environment and therefore,
behavior, like Darwin said, and from which you have done no actual research? Let's examine this:

How about genetic? Well with a solid background in biology, you will have no problem reading the thousands of papers published since the Human Genome
Project started, which shows the ridiculous amount of genetic homology between us and other organisms, suggesting that we all originated from a single
life form 2 billion years ago. I'm not going to waste my time, because there are so many, but really, is any of this enough to change your mind? I
think not.

I can go on and on. But really, was this serious? Did the OP actual write a serious post? This is a Theory, which is extremely strong at the moment.
Why? Because the evidence to support it is so strong. Creationism will NEVER see the light of day quite frankly because the silly "evidence" lies in
2-3 thousand year old stories. And based on that logic, They should be just as likely to believe in Extraterrestrials creating man, because there are
older texts from which many biblical tales have been plagiarized which "document" this happening.

Ok fish with legs Mud skipper.
mammal with wings bat
bird with flippers penguin
land mammal with flipperts seal,sealion ect.
sea mammal with two flippers at front and tail remnants of back legs still there the whales...loads of them some related to hippo's. Oh no they have
legs...

So did you just learn that proper scientific research relies on the principle of falsifiability? You do realize evolution is refutable? For one, you
just refuted it, but not with a valid counter-argument. Maybe if you said there were inconsistencies in the fossil record, then we could have a
productive discussion on the validity of evolution. It is actually very observable, just look at the fossil records and layers of debris across the
globe. That's basically the foundation of macroevolutionary theory. Or you could read On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin, and then read on the
results of a research conducted by Thomas Hunt Morgan on his experiments with induced genetic mutation in Fruit Flies via manipulation of air quality;
thats observable evolution. Another example of observable evolution? Check out Peter and Rosemary Grant's findings on their observations of the beak
depth of Darwin's finches on Galapagos Island and how environment (a drought specifically) affected the populations of finches in such a way that
caused larger beaked finches to out-survive smaller beaked finches and the newer generations spawned from the large beak finches had even bigger beaks
on average.

Remember, evolution is a process. Evolution itself is not spontaneous except in rare occasions that a mutation occurs and expresses itself in
beneficial ways; although the conditions that determine how fast the process proceeds are more commonly spontaneous, and thats what causes long-term
or short term changes in species and "genus" around the globe. Basically environment is mostly the reason why species evolve. To adapt to changes in
their environment right?

All the data collected by evolutionary theorists, anthropologist, evo-psychs etc. supports the evolution THEORY. Evolution is just that; a theory, not
a law like gravity (even the laws of gravity have changed since Newton! Science is a process just as much as evolution is!) and so far, there is a lot
of supporting evidence, and not a lot of counter-evidence, other than religious ambiguity. And yes, the scientific method is very much applied to
evolutionary theory. If it weren't, american schools would be teaching christian fundamentalism. You first have to learn what the scientific method
is. Fossil records are not scientific method, they are sources of observation and inference. Actually observing and inferring is part of the
Scientific method.

Anyways, there's some empirical data for you that I learned in 2 anthropology classes. you can scour through my recommendations for yourself because
nothing is more true than what you see and understand for yourself.

Originally posted by KJV1611
More questions. Explain where the sexes came from during evolution?

And for that matter, explain how TWO different "things" evolved from hot rocks, then to goo, then to sea creatures....and they managed to find a
sexual partner too?

Explain why if only the strongest survive then why has EVERY CREATURE ON THIS PLANET never evolved to live forever? Every thing dies. So much for
natural selection.

How come people are getting stupider instead of getting smarter?

Well there is a jellyfish that can live forever by reversing the aging process, there goes most of your arguement... Yes why are people not getting
smarter? One only has to look in the mirror to find out.....

Thanks for that link and info. Interesting stuff. It makes sense that these people would adapt to the high altitude.

This info make me wonder about Hilter's fascination with the Tibetan people. He sent a team of scientist to measure and study their anatomy. Hitler
also believed in a hollow earth, maybe he thought the Tibetans came from Agartha, the supposed entrance to the inner erth city.

What your asking is impossible to provide, the best that can be provided is a hybrid fossil, since evolution works on a generation to generation
basis. Do you honestly think that the first dog was a wolf when it was born and a dog when it died. Small changes is a fundament of evolution. The
child born slightly different from it's parents, and their offspring different still. Your entire question is poorly framed and as a result, you skew
any response. Besides, what is a creationist doing talking about the 'scientific process'? The creationist argument is based around a book that was
written 70+ years after the events described, rewritten and translated 5+ times between its origin and your reading of it. That and some small
circumstantial evidence like a disc with pictures of dinosaurs and humans together on it.

People do life sentances in prison for far less evidence than evolution has provided, and though I will admit that the science is still young and is
likely to go through transformations in its understanding similar to the transition from Newtonian physics to Einstein's General Relativity, its a
hell of a lot more believable than a man in the clouds whose mandate is to screw with your head.

I'd rather be wrong and have to ask 'God' for forgiveness, than hold back the advancement of civilization any further than religion already has.
Spirituality is fine, it gives us the motivation to look within and confront the unknowns of life, but religion is routine and ritual with a dash of
guilt and a heaping spoon of gullibility.

No offense, but that is just how ridiculous this whole inquiry seems to me.

Thanks but the Fossil Record is not scientific method science, it's purely speculative because its not observable, repeatable, or refutable and thus
does not qualify as either a scientific fact or theory. Sounds like a faith to me?

I'd say it's actual solid evidence, unlike the stories from a archaic book created by man to control man. Ok so like someone posted earlier, where
is your scientific method science proof of creationism?

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.